Anna Frost broke the women’s course record at Transvulcania by over an hour and 45 minutes in winning the 2012 edition of the race. She finished 13th overall, besting many top male ultrarunners from around the world in the process. In the following interview, hear how she approaches running from the front, her emotional investment in races, where she dreams of racing, where she’s headed after running Zegama, and whether she’s single.

Anna Frost 2012 Transvulcania Champion Interview Transcript

iRunFar: Bryon Powell here with Anna Frost, the 2012 women’s champion of the Transvulcania ultra. How are you doing today?

Anna Frost: Very good, thanks.

iRF: We’re a couple of days after the race and we’ve finally had a chance to take a couple deep breaths and relax a bit.

Frost: Yeah, it’s been a bit like that.

iRF: So looking back at the race, did you lead the whole way? Was there ever a woman in front of you?

Frost: I actually thought when we started that there might be another woman ahead of me because it was a pretty chaotic start. It was just black and it suddenly went from a wide road to a narrow single track so there certainly could have been a woman ahead of me, but then just up the road a bit they said I was the first woman, so from there on I was first.

iRF: Did you have any ups and downs in the race or were you pretty even the whole time?

Frost: No, mentally, I was good the whole way, which was cool. Physically, I had a real low from about 26k to 36k or so. It goes down and then gradually goes back up. It’s fast running and you have to get your legs turning over again after 26k of going uphill. My legs just wouldn’t move; they were just flat. Fortunately, there were some people around so I just got it in my head that I just had to get through that section and then it was uphill from there. Once I got to the steep section, I was fine. Then, of course, going 20k downhill is bound to hurt, so yeah, that was a big down.

iRF: You sort of have this, at least outwardly, this forward-looking, positive attitude. Were you ever instead of chasing the guys in front of you were you thinking, “Oh man, there’s a woman chasing me…”

Frost: Yeah, when you’re in first place, you’re always running scared, because you have no idea. I had no feedback at any time during the race where the next woman was or even who the next woman was. I couldn’t see anyone when I’d look back at switchbacks or wherever, so I knew I had at least a couple of minutes. But I wasn’t really too worried about it. I knew or I was pretty confident that my uphill was going to be strong. The only thing I wasn’t confident about was my downhill or if the girls were going to catch me on the down. So I just turned that into a positive, “Well, you’ve got to get down the hill in the lead, because you don’t want to be fighting it out in those last couple of Ks.”

iRF: Certainly. You also seem to be very emotionally invested in your racing. Do you think that’s true and how so?

Frost: Yeah, I guess when I race I race to win it, generally, if it’s a focus race. I put a lot of my life into it. It is my life. So this race has absorbed me for the last 6 weeks. I’ve been living on La Palma; I’ve been training on the course. I’ve done everything possible to make this race a winning race. So yeah, I’d say I’ve been very emotionally attached to this.

iRF: More broadly, you seem to have a really deep, deep passion for running. How has that developed through your life? You’ve only been doing the ultra thing for maybe two years now, but you’ve been running for quite awhile.

Frost: Yeah, I guess I found the passion for it in 2004 when I came across the Mountain Running Championships. Since then, I’ve been doing a lot of traveling and racing all around the world, it’s been a really nice… it’s worked well together so that passion has been kept alive because I’m always doing something that’s creating that spark again.

iRF: It seems from the outsider’s perspective that it’s almost growing in time (talking to you at TNF Endurance Challenge a couple years ago to now). You really just want to be in the mountains.

Frost: Yeah, I’m just really getting more and more intrigued and curious and I’m learning more. The more you learn and the more you know, the more you want to learn and so I’m in that vicious cycle now.

iRF: Speaking of what you want, do you have a bucket list of dream places or races that, “I want to go do that,” or have you not had the time?

Frost: No, I’ve never really had a bucket list or a fridge list (whatever). I’ve always just kept my door or opportunities open. People have said to me, “Oh, you’ve gotta do that race,” and if it inspires me and it works for me, then I’m going to go try to do it. But I think UTMB is intriguing me quite a lot at the moment and I guess from having a lot of the Americans out here this time, I’ve been getting a lot of the influence for Hardrock as everyone’s saying that I would love that. So these are things that I’m just starting to think about and wonder about if that could be an option.

iRF: Well, from your recent schedule and those dreams it seems you’ve really made a transition from mountain running to ultrarunning. Has that been a conscious decision or is it just where your interests lie?

Frost: No, I wouldn’t say I’m totally sold on ultrarunning. It sounds funny, but this was only my third [ultra] and, like I’ve said, there’s so much to learn. I still love starting at the bottom of a hill and running for 8k up to the top and calling it a day. But yeah, I think because I’ve had quite a bit of experience in the shorter mountain running, and the mountain marathon distance, I’m sort of getting intrigued and wanting to know what to challenge myself with in new things, so I guess that’s why the longer distances are creeping in. But I think I’ll always be involved in mountain marathon distances and shorter distances as well.

iRF: So you’ve been living in La Palma for 6 weeks now, where to next (aside from you’re going to be racing Zegama next weekend)? Where’s home after Zegama?

Frost: Home after that will be a camper van in France. So that will be my next 6-week home. After Zegama, I’ll have most of my time in and around the Chamonix region looking at the UTMB route and running that with the Salomon team just as a fun run around the route over a couple of days and staying up in the mountain huts. So that will be fantastic. Then, we’ll probably do the Chamonix-Mount Blanc Marathon there. Then, I’ll head out to America and I’ll have about 2 months there where I’m not sure exactly what my home “device” will be there, but it will be going to Speedgoat, which is an ultra in the Skyrunning series. Then, it will be Transrockies and the big weekend of Leadville and Pikes Peak. There will be a lot of Salomon runners there as well as all the other friends I’ve made through this running community. I’ll be there to support all of them.

iRF: What have you heard about Speedgoat? I ask that with interest because I live about 10 miles as the crow flies from there.

Frost: Right. I’ve heard nothing about the race actually. It’s just that it’s in the ultra series and I’m going. I’ve been a little bit in the area; I was in Park City a little bit last year, so I kind of know the region that I’m going. But yeah, I don’t know if I’ve been on the course at all.

iRF: Yeah, you wouldn’t have been on the course in Park City. This next question I ask with the knowledge of my girlfriend who suggested it for everyone at iRunFar.com. You’ve got a lot of guy fans out there, so I have to ask the question, are you single?

Frost: Yes, I’m single, BUT, the reason I’m single is because running is my passion. I’ve battled with relationships because I’ve got people in my life that I love having in my life but at the moment, running has taken my priority. It’s a really hard thing to do to sacrifice a loving relationship for going off in search of your running, but it’s fair and it’s what my heart says to do, so it’s been my decision.

iRF: You’re following one passion. Excellent. I look forward to seeing you follow your passion around Europe this week and around America later this summer. Congratulations and thank you very much.

Why should I (or anyone) have to "deal with" sexist comments? I have every right to call out someone's misogynistic views! It is unacceptable. I'm not attacking the person. I'm criticizing the negative comments made. Unfortunately, the sexualization of female athletes is super prevalent in the sporting world, and I for one would like to not see it leak into the ultra community.

Why shouldn't this criticism be dealt with? Even if you disagree? Where is your thoughtful response? FYI – "She's hot, therefore I can say that about her across a public forum" – does not count. How about some self-reflection, instead of telling me to f-off?

The focus, as it was in the interviews with Anna and Dakota, should be on running, attitude, dedication, training, etc. Relationships, and other personal issues, are certainly fine too (we all want to know more about them), but only if the interviewee is open to talking about them. Anna (and Dakota) get to define themselves, not you. That was what Benj did, and why I replied the way I did. He want straight to sexualizing her – rather than anything else.

If "sweet eye candiness" is such an obvious topic to comment on, as you suggest, why haven't any of the good-looking successful guys been called out on their appearance (and I don't mean jokes about hair length)?

Again, if there really is nothing degrading to women about calling someone "eye-candy", how come you are so defensive? How about you spare us YOUR self-righteous indignation about having sexist comments called out!

Clearly this has gotten out of hand, everyone knows Ian Sharman with his boyish charm and good looks is the eye candy of the ultra world. Though the more seasoned crowd may be fond of Karl Meltzer's win total, thus adding to his mystique.

I would LOVE to see an Anna vs. Ellie face-off! They truly do seem to be at a significantly higher level than most of their competitors (though I don't think either has reached the level of Ann Trason… yet, anyway).

Many people are faster than me… Having a category that segregates women from "those that are faster", implies that it shouldn’t happen normally happen. Why?

For the most part, ultra-distances are physiology equalizing races. Why shouldn’t someone who has trained smarter and harder; has more experience on the course; stays on their fueling plan; has genetic advantages; drinks less beer than me, be faster than me? They SHOULD! So what if it is a woman?

So, “being chicked” assumes women are weaker…less-superior to men, and therefore shouldn't normally be able to beat said troglodyte. Unless he had [insert whinny excuse here].

It’s bullshit, it’s not true, and yes…[fill-in the blank if you’ve learned something].

You may have taken your position too far, Scott. There are separate men's and women's winners because the times are still very different. Consider the 2010 WS 100 results: the 1st place woman was four hours behind Geoff Roes.

Sure Anonymous…but the point is that the term exists and it is often used because it happens in most races to many men. Expect those men that place the highest overall. Otherwise, the question wouldn't have been asked at all. This is an "age-grouper" question, rather than a pro/elite podium question.

Also, the issue isn't whether separate men's and women's winners are sexist. Obviously it is needed. The issue is what does the term "being chicked" imply. That's what I was answering.

It all comes back around to the first "eye-candy" reply. Anna won AND smashed the CR by almost two hours! That certainly should be what this discussion should have been about. What if Anna improves her down-hilling? Holy fast…The next 5 women also beat the course record. Pretty awesome. Where are they racing next? These results reflect performances as impressive, or even more so, than the men's performances.

That's what's interesting! That's what is fun to talk about and be in impressed by and want to even attempt to emulate (not to mention how chill all these folks are).

What is NOT interesting are the whiny dillweeds crying about their "right" to objectify women whether I like it or not.

It sure does and it happens to be a well documented fact that as a group women are weaker than men. This is the whole reason men and women have separate categories. The women don't run slower because they are lazy and don't train as hard, they run slower because they naturally don't produce as much force on push-off (i.e. they are weaker).

To claim that they are not inherently weaker means that the reason for their slower performances must lie elsewhere (perhaps you could argue they don't train as hard or push as hard). This is incredibly insulting to women! While there are obviously women stronger than most men and men weaker than most women, the fact remains that the fastest men are faster than the fastest women and the average man is faster than the average woman.

For some perspective on this issue, consider the fact that Anna's winning time was 17.3% slower than Dakota's. All indications are that she trains just as hard and her performance is just as impressive, but this is only so because we all acknowledge that women are naturally weaker.

I acknowledged, obviously less clearly than I had hoped, that my response about using the term "being chicked" was not about having separate categories for women and men in athletic events given their demonstrable physical differences. I agree with you and with Anonymous. Comparisons of average times and elites at the head of the bell curve don't effect my arguments, although I agree with your analysis.

My concern is that we have a gendered term "chicked" for when someone is faster than another person. My question, is why do we have this term?

My thoughts are that dudes don't expect to be passed by women. Obviously they do get passed, otherwise the term wouldn't exist. The question is whether it is being used in a derogatory way.

I expect to be passed by anyone who trains harder, better, longer, etc, than me. Period. I don't say I got "dude-d", "geezer-ed", "long-haired-ed", "non-shirt wearing-ed". Why don't those terms exist? Because men feel insulted when a fitter woman passes them, but not when a more fit man does. So, yes – it is being used in a derogatory way. It's a stereotype – it's sexist.

I will say that it is a fuzzy area. Many men probably use it in a sense of respect for the woman passing them – acknowledging their superior training. But again, why does a gendered term exist, why not just say "good-job", looking strong" or "can you teach me how to run up hills like that?" and be done with it…while ignoring the likely pithy response of "run up more hills in training…"

The reason most guys don't focus on whether they were beat by someone shirtless or bearded or wearing aviator sunglasses as much as they focus on whether they were beat by a woman has everything to do with the fact that it is MUCH MORE IMPRESSIVE for a woman to beat them than it is for another male with different fashion sense. This has everything to do with the fact that women are naturally weaker.

In order for a woman to beat Dakota or Kilian by 1%, she would have to train much more than 1% harder than Dakota or Kilian to overcome their natural advantage. The same goes for mid- and back-packers… the woman beating you by running 1% faster is far more than 1% faster on an age-graded basis (which accounts for natural gender differences)– probably more like 15% faster. Thus, getting beat by a woman is a much more remarkable event than getting beat by a guy who dresses or looks different than you, and this is why the term "getting chicked" exists.

The same thing goes for getting beat by someone older (assuming the older runner is over 40, around the time ultra performances seem to start declining). For this reason, I propose that we all start using the term "geezered" as a matter of respect for the older badasses who hand it to us in races, despite the weakening effects of age. I, for one, feel no shame in admitting that I have been both chicked and geezered before. Major props to the outstanding athletes who have beaten me despite their age-graded disadvantage!

I have seen multiple comments by female fans of the sport regarding how dreamy/sexy Anton and Joe Grant are. I'm sure similar comments have been made about others as well. Anna is obviously a bright, passionate and absurdly fast young woman who happens to be super cute. While I am more impressed by her passion, dedication and race performances than her looks, I see absolutely no harm in calling her out as the hottie she is. I could be wrong, but in her shoes, I suspect I would be flattered by such praise.

Finally, there is nothing "sexist" about Benj's comments. What if Benj is a woman? Is it still sexist? Or what if Benj was instead calling out Anton as the eye candy of the ultra world? (I saw plenty of female comments to that effect in blog comments and twitter streams back when Anton was more in the racing spotlight before his freak shin injury.) You can argue that such comments are degrading or trivializing, but I don't think there are any grounds to call them sexist.

My arguments have been about the "eye-candy" comment as well as replies by others made against my comments. A woman's potential reaction to having a compliment paid to her is separate from all of those discussions. Certainly it wouldn't nullify them.

My opinion and criticisms have been grounded in the interpretation that a single, isolated comment calling a woman – who you don't know (I'm assuming), who just had an amazing athletic performance, who just opened up in a interview – "eye-candy" – was inappropriate and not in the spirit of praise you describe. Of course, that is my interpretation and I could have over-analyzed Benj's statement or intent. However, others have responded with enough info that there is no confusion what they think. Many of my additional comments were leveled at their responses.

I don't disagree that many folks like being praised for not only their skills, but their looks. Again, "eye-candy" is more objectification than flattery – even if the dude thinks he's being flattering he is wrong – sorry. Best to learn a new way to "impress" a woman. This objectification is pretty heavily backed up by centuries of evidence, so forgive me if I don't wait for one or two other women to jump in and confirm it. Besides, it is our role as dudes to check this kind of b.s. coming from other dudes. I suspect women are pretty sick of dealing with it.

Also, I'm really not sure how one could degrade and/or trivialize a woman and NOT have it be sexist. Pretty sure that is the definition.

Yup – #2 from Webster: behavior, conditions, or attitudes that foster stereotypes of social roles based on sex.

The stereotype being that women can be treated as sex objects regardless of their skills.

Also, what was said and what continues to be defended, is not erased or proven incorrect just because some women have commented on how a dude looks. My claims of sexism and objectification still stand. Those comments toward Anton is also a separate issue.

I tried to make the case that this is a concern we as a community should embrace and discuss. So far, yours is one of the few rebuttals that takes a discussion-style approach. So thank you. Even if I still stand by what I've stated.

You've convinced me and changed my mind a bit, Scott. It may not have been intended as such, but the comment probably was a bit sexist, insofar as there exists a stereotype that women are eye candy and men are athletes… so calling Anna out as eye candy reinforces that stereotype, which (according to the dictionary definition) is sexist.

Allow me to take this moment to apologize to Anna on behalf of males in general and myself in particular for any sexist sentiments we have had (however innocent their intent may have been). You rock as an athlete and as a human, and I personally can only hope that I am one day as fast as you!

Great interview. She such a classy and charming person and SO STRONG. Agree with previous comments that Anna vs Ellie is great match up. Throw in Lizzy Hawker and some of the top US women… epic.

I hope people in the comments section can please keep it classy. It feels like some people think this is LetsRun rather than iRunFar.

Yes, saying, "Getting Chicked" is sexist. And moreover it makes you sound insecure which is really what the term indicates. Trust me guys there are women better than you in every discipline in human endeavor, don't worry about it.

In the interest of "keeping it classy" (which I interpret as avoiding sensitive or taboo topics), I really should let this lie, but in the grand tradition of AJW and philosophical runners everywhere, I must point out that for some readers, your statement that "there are women better than you in every discipline in human endeavor" is not true.

Now, in my own case, it is absolutely true. There are no doubt LOADS of women better than me in every discipline of human endeavor (certainly in the discipline of keeping my mouth shut :). I am totally comfortable with this fact and I actually think it is awesome. I love meeting, talking with and getting inspired by smart, capable women (and men, but that is beside the point). However, last year alone there were hundreds of men who ran a marathon faster than any woman on earth has ever run a marathon. There were hundreds more who did the same in 10Ks, 5Ks, 1500s, etc. Same goes for Olympic weightlifting, track cycling, etc, etc. And if you address your statement to any of those blokes, it's false. There are no women better than these guys at these things, past or present.

On a related note (and to address another part of your comment), I'm not sure that "getting chicked" is sexist in the same way that calling Anna eye candy is (see my comment above for why I came around to thinking that was sexist). The reason for my uncertainty lies in the definition of sexism, namely "behavior, conditions, or attitudes that foster stereotypes of social roles based on sex." I fully concede that talking about getting chicked reinforces the stereotype that women are slower than men, but this isn't a social stereotype based on some socially-fabricated gender role. It is a physical stereotype based on an empirical fact– namely, that women actually are, on average, slower than men.

So my question is, should Webster's definition be expanded beyond social roles to include "getting chicked" as a sexist term? Or should I purchase a new audiobook to keep my mind occupied on my twice-daily runs so I don't think about all this stuff so much?

Oh, and I would be remiss if I were to fail to point out that Ellie Greenwood and Anna Frost are the only two authors to have used the term "chicked" in articles on this very site. Frosty's quote is my favorite: "I won’t rub it in that we ‘chicked’ a handful of Ultra Running demons, but I will… just this once." (from http://www.irunfar.com/2011/12/sharing-hurt-joy-b…. Also see Ellie's Chuckanut 50K report, a race in which she chicked a lot of blokes: http://www.irunfar.com/2012/03/knucking-down-suck….

I love Anna and Ellie's uses of chicked because they employ the term in a very fun-loving, low-key, not-self-righteous-or-overly-concerned-with-being-PC sort of fashion. Which is awesome. Fast and easygoing gets my vote over fast and uptight every time (this goes equally for men and women).

I fully expect crickets here, but I would love to hear what others think on all this (though if you have relationships with other humans to keep intact, it may be best to take the mini-novella I've written in the comments today as a guide of what NOT to do and instead keep your more controversial thoughts to yourself).

My 83 year old mom eightied a numbered of people in a 5k last week. Not sure how she would feel about 'chicked' but pretty sure 'geezered' is worse than 'eye candy'. I've been baby joggered in a road 5k so now I stay on the trails.

Agreed! Thank you, Vanessa. I thought this comment section was supposed to be about how awesome Anna Frost is, not about what someone considers sexist or not sexist.

I wouldn't mind being called eye candy of the ultra-running world (or any world, for that matter). And I definitely wouldn't take offense to it. And besides, I use the term 'chicked' all the time, and love it!

Well it seems opinion on the eye candy comment does not depend on gender. I agree this comment section *should* be on how awesome Anna is, but the first comment made no reference to her performance, only to her appearance, thus setting off the firestorm. I personally found it very rude and would not appreciate such a label at all. I don't mind being judged on a scale from fast to slow or strong to weak, but calling someone eye candy both takes focus off the impressive expansion of the fast/strong scale and creates an image based scale from 'eye candy' to 'fugly' that is completely pointless. I want to be faster and stronger, I don't want 'prettier' to be valued in this sport. Can you imagine if it really was? I picture people applying mascara at aid stations, trying to win the coveted 'eye candy' award. Ugg.

When winning the the TNF50 the last two years, Frosty beat both Ellie (2011) and Lizzy (2010) into 2nd place. So that's how she goes against them. I think both of them may be more suited to the 100+ mile events than Frosty is. Note Frosty's comments in the interview in regards to the distances she enjoys.

Frosty is eye candy, my wife thinks so and still lets me go away for weekends and train with her.

Matt (who would like to take on Frosty and Lizzie when fit and not injured)

Whoa, Matt. Are you suggesting that Ellie or Lizzy can't improve on their fitness of 2010 or 2011? Or that the relative ranking of runners is set in stone? All we can say is that's how it HAS GONE… we can't say anything about how it WILL GO.

Case in point: Kilian had always beaten Dakota before last weekend, but Dakota got faster. There are a million similar examples. To suggest that we already know how a matchup would play out between Frosty and Ellie and Lizzy (or any runners of similar ability) is absurd! And that's a good thing, as it makes the race (and build-up to the race) more exciting.

Sorry to get so fired up. I'm just really bothered by the suggestion that you can't change how fast you are. It's not always easy, but (for most of us) it is absolutely something you can change. Maybe you can only run 1 or 2 miles today (that was me a few years back, and even that was painful), but if you work at it, soon you'll be able to run 3 or 4 or 100. Same goes for speed– if you focus on it and put in the time and energy to change it, you will improve. Few things are as exciting and empowering as that!

Nah, not saying that at all. Read the next senetence. I think both Lizzy and Ellie have had their best performances at distances that exceed 50 miles. For Ellie that has meant world 100k champs and Western States and for Lizzie, that's been World 100k, UTMB and 24 hour Road.

Frosty on the other hand has a history of going up hills and that's what she is happy doing. Again, read/listen to her comments on that in the interviews. If she took on Ellie and Lizzie at the 100k worlds (she wouldn't) she'd get her arse spanked.

I think they're all different athletes and you only need to go to their results to see where it is they excel. I was on the course with Lizzy when she set the 24hr World Road best. I then came home and spent summer running, training and tripping around with Frosty. A lot of that time was obviously spent talking about the womans standards around the place. All of them are outstanding and different courses suit different athletes.

Kilian v Dakota – I think you nailed it with your comments about training. 1 did and 1 didn't ;-)

If a 64 year old man said something like that to me, I would be creeped out no matter who said it. Just because somebody is an celebrity in the ultra world doesn't mean he has the right to make comments like that. When I was 16 Gordy made a comment on my low cut shirt when I was working an aid station, lets just say I did not find it hilarious.

Yeah, partly because of the initial bone-headed comment and also because of the uptight reponses to it. It kind of beggars belief that people devote so much time to debating something which isn't going to be solved here or any other arena – online or otherwise – so whoever has their nether regions in a knot about it should go for a good long run before they start typing. Surely there are better things to do! And by the way, I am proud Anna Frost won the Transvulcania. Ledge.

"There I was at 48 miles when this guy wearing a pair of monkey shoes goes flying past me. I never saw him again.I got Vibramed,Bro!"

I guess the good news is if a chick can't be chicked, a geezer like me can't be man geezered (I assume 50 years old is the minimum). But I can be chicked, bearded,vibramed,geezer chicked & chick vibramed,even geezer chicked, vibramed, and chick vibramed all by the same person.

Hopefully never chick geezered, vibramed, chick vibramed & bearded by the same person.

first i'd ever heard of the word. He said it with such hatred in his heart, really brought me down.. That sucked. I work hard to perform at my best (my best, not his) and i should never feel ashamed to push..

.. the way i see it. 'chicked' or any other name is only defined by the intention behind it.

..eye candy was very innocently said (not speaking for Anna but im sure there was no offense taken).. and i laugh endlessly with the geezers who continue to outsmart me :)